and the localzone in
named.conf
Package: Bind9
Version: 1:9.5.1.dfsg.P3-1
I have made a default installation of bind and are using it for resolving my
networknames.
Everytime i started a fresh installed computer, i did get an icon with :
avahi is disabled because your using a .local network
Are there any problems/issues with removing the forwarders statement in my
gateway's named.conf??
After upgrading my potato box's version of bind I apparently lost contact
with my ISP's DNS machines. With their being unavailable over the weekend
and my needing the contact, I sim
What problems might I encounter because I have toasted the forwarders
statement in my gateway's named.conf??
My gateway seemed to lose contact with the ISP DNS's when I upgraded the
potato bind package following the announcement about the worm (yes, that is
now a part of my source
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 16.15 11/7/00 +0100, Oliver Schoenknecht wrote:
>Hey everyone,
>
>when I restart my nameserver via the "ndc reload"-command, it
>tells me the following :
>
>dialin named[984]: /etc/named.conf:9: syntax error near allow
On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 04:15:14PM +0100, Oliver Schoenknecht wrote:
Looks like a parentheses mismatch in the forwarders clause;
> // generated by named-bootconf.pl
>
> options {
> directory "/var/named";
> forward only;
> forwarders {
> 194.231.62.3;
Hey everyone,
when I restart my nameserver via the "ndc reload"-command, it
tells me the following :
dialin named[984]: /etc/named.conf:9: syntax error near allow-
transfer
Jul 11 16:06:44 dialin named[984]: /etc/named.conf:12: syntax
error near '}'
Alas,
the first twen
On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Markus Stausberg wrote:
Hi List,
I found redundant information in the BIND 8 Configuration Files
'/etc/named.conf' and '/var/named.boot' (or other files included in the
latter).
Which is relevant ? Why does the other one exi
Hi List,
I found redundant information in the BIND 8 Configuration Files
'/etc/named.conf' and '/var/named.boot' (or other files included in the latter).
Which is relevant ? Why does the other one exist ? What role plays the
(undocumented) program 'bindconfig' ?
regards, Markus
> You could also just edit /var/named/boot.{zones,options} as before and then
> use the command named-bootconf to automatically convert them to the new
> syntax.
Yep, that did the trick :-)
Muchas gracias
Stef
On Tue, Sep 15, 1998 at 01:12:31PM +0100, Oliver Thuns wrote:
> >I made a new install. Debian 1.3.1 is running on another machine.
>
> Dann ist alles klar :-)
>
> >I ran bindconfig, which created a new /etc/named.conf file, but also a
> >new /var/named/boot.options
Stef Hoesli Wiederwald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Under Debian 1.3.1 I just had a /etc/named.boot file. In Debian 2.0
>ther is now also a more complicated looking /etc/named.conf file, and
>guess what, my nameserver is not serving the zones it should be
>primary for any
>I made a new install. Debian 1.3.1 is running on another machine.
Dann ist alles klar :-)
>I ran bindconfig, which created a new /etc/named.conf file, but also a
>new /var/named/boot.options file without all the zones named should
>act as primary server for. So I mve
> The primaries are configured in named.conf with a new syntax (primary
> is now master). If you now run bindconfig, your old zones will be put
> in named.conf.
No, I ran bindconfig once more, and ended up with the same result as before...
Stef
; bindconfig to update named.conf.
I ran bindconfig, which created a new /etc/named.conf file, but also a
new /var/named/boot.options file without all the zones named should
act as primary server for. So I mved /var/named/boot.options.old to
/var/named/boot.options, and sent named a HUP, but it
>Under Debian 1.3.1 I just had a /etc/named.boot file. In Debian 2.0
>ther is now also a more complicated looking /etc/named.conf file, and
>guess what, my nameserver is not serving the zones it should be
>primary for anymore. I guess this is just a RTFM issue. So could
>someone
Under Debian 1.3.1 I just had a /etc/named.boot file. In Debian 2.0
ther is now also a more complicated looking /etc/named.conf file, and
guess what, my nameserver is not serving the zones it should be
primary for anymore. I guess this is just a RTFM issue. So could
someone please tell me which
16 matches
Mail list logo
